But...
I assume the engine oscillates the vane by +/-90 degrees for example rather than rotating it through 360 degrees. This seems to imply that each of the 3 faces are alternatively creating a compression on one half and an equal rarefaction on the other. Seems to me that much of the SPL would therefore immediately cancel.

Then if I recall my high school fluid dynamics I can imagine more and more fluid escaping around the edges of the vane with decreasing oscillation frequency, creating more SPL loss.

Lastly, cast your memory back to the film "Crocodile Dundee" where he 'telephones' for help by both rotating and spinning a flat stick on the end of a string. As a kid we used to make and play with these toys by the way. The key observations were that the tone was lower with increasing width of the flat stick and the hum was louder with increasing rotational speed. Sort of implies that the various frequencies require their own vane?

I hear ya, Perceval. I want to like it too - but the paucity of the details to make it work or performance to be expected is really making it hard. A photograph or video would do wonders. A small desktop lite "computer" speaker version would be great to get the conversation going. I am a bit lazy to dig out my dead HD's and find appropriate Torx drivers to uncase them and strip out the pivot voice coil mechanism. The MBL "Hot Air Balloon" omni looks a lot more interesting with fact that I can strip apart any regular dynamic driver to get the axial voice coil.

But...
I assume the engine oscillates the vane by +/-90 degrees for example rather than rotating it through 360 degrees. This seems to imply that each of the 3 faces are alternatively creating a compression on one half and an equal rarefaction on the other. Seems to me that much of the SPL would therefore immediately cancel.

There is also the generation of eddies and separation at the tip if movement (slew) is too fast and angle of attack too steep. In the end it is a very solvable problem with direct numerical simulations with Navier Stokes equations over a 2D slice assuming infinite length.

Then if I recall my high school fluid dynamics I can imagine more and more fluid escaping around the edges of the vane with decreasing oscillation frequency, creating more SPL loss.

Lastly, cast your memory back to the film "Crocodile Dundee" where he 'telephones' for help by both rotating and spinning a flat stick on the end of a string. As a kid we used to make and play with these toys by the way. The key observations were that the tone was lower with increasing width of the flat stick and the hum was louder with increasing rotational speed. Sort of implies that the various frequencies require their own vane?

ďIf I could make a suggestion, it would be to make a "lite" version of the kit, using cheaper and readily available parts, something like a small desk system, that would be an oddity people could put on the desk of their office, let it be a conversation starter that people would talk about, and then, maybe some would be interested in the "big boy" version to try at home. Sell that lite version around $400 and you might have some interests. If I could make a suggestion, it would be to make a "lite" version of the kit, using cheaper and readily available parts, something like a small desk system, that would be an oddity people could put on the desk of their office, let it be a conversation starter that people would talk about, and then, maybe some would be interested in the "big boy" version to try at home. Sell that lite version around $400 and you might have some interests.Ē

Excellent suggestion, but personally l donít want to be a manufacturer. I want to stay in the background and license my patent. You start a kickstarter. Iíll license the patent to you or just about anybody. Speaker projects appear to have a higher rate of success than most any other category.

The most difficult component is the motor. If you read my patent, it only covers the diaphragm design, which is the critical component. Youíre licensing my patent to build the diaphragm. You supply a motor; any motor. There are any number of possible designs and configurations. You canít patent my motor as described in my patent because the patent ďrevealsĒ it.

So how about a simple movie to let us hear the prototype? These static pictures and words don't do that much to get anyone started.

Well there is a video posted on YouTube by a physicist. It is an incomplete implementation but a functioning prototype; several years old. The problem with a video is itís dependence on the recording chain and the playback equipment limitations.

That said, I will be making one and posting it sometime in the near future.

Interesting observations. Therory and practice. Regardless of theorizing the Planot sounds great. I could tell you a long story about one of the top supercomputers in the US, at the time, and itís failure to model the performance of the Planot. It wasnít the failure of the compuer(s) but the fact that the software, Ansys FLUENT, could not model it, apparently because this special case was not within the world view of Fluent. The physicsist and engineer who were going to model it abandoned the project because, even though the engineer was fluent in Fluent, he could not see how to proceed.

Excellent suggestion, but personally l donít want to be a manufacturer. I want to stay in the background and license my patent. You start a kickstarter. Iíll license the patent to you or just about anybody. Speaker projects appear to have a higher rate of success than most any other category.

Hello John,

I understand you love your baby, but... you'll need to support it a bit more if you want people to seriously consider it.

Starting a Kickstarter funding project to raise the money to get the license on a speaker I have no idea how it really looks or perform is really not on my list of things to do right now.

I have a project on my own, and I was not afraid to build the whole thing myself, measure and share the measurements.

Same goes with a lot of people here, X and his 10F model (or the mini-K, or the XKRi, or...), Wesayso and his twin towers, Bjorn and his TABAQ, P10 and his Frugal line, etc...

My take on audio (especially here at DIYAudio) is that we try stuff... and sometimes stumble onto something interesting. Most of us are happy to share the findings.

But, there's usually a process on how we got there. A trail of failures and successes, ultimately coming up to a design we feel is interesting.

Like I mentioned, I doubt many will try to get your license at $1,000 for a project that cost $5,000 on parts to build, ... and nothing to show for besides a couple of patent pictures.

If I may again, I'd suggest you give a bit more information, and, like you mentioned, a bit more exposure for the project.

Attending DIY meetings, or DIY audio shows and getting people to hear and review your design would go a long way into finding people who would be willing to take the plunge, if they felt it was worth it.

Thanks for that,
but why not the real thing instead of a "crude prototype"?

Watching that 20-second video taken near field with a crappy camera and mic, I can clearly hear tone changes as the camera moves horizontally and vertically. How it translates into the room, I have no idea.